3 ms·
You're clearly outside 2sd so, while I appreciate that you have lots of email chains, you will obviously concede that your outlier case cannot define the conduc
by mattlutze 13y ago
You're clearly outside 2sd so, while I appreciate that you have lots of email chains, you will obviously concede that your outlier case cannot define the conduct of the vast majority of internet users. An outlier case I hope you'll agree I acknowledged:
> Along with that, email clients threading messages for you
allows for relatively seamless review of history if necessary.
- ColinWright 13y agoBut when replying I don't want the full history. I end up with email messages that are thousands of lines long, usually with several threads in each, and finding the individual separate thread, spread throughout the entire quote-upon-quote-upon-quote ... is just not feasible. I'm left trawling through the same email many, many times, trying to extract the bits that matter to assemble them into a sensible, consistent, coherent narrative. At least, that's what happens when I use any of the standard email clients. but I don't. I use a really old, completely non-standard email client so I can, on every reply, extract the text that matters and assemble it into a single conversation, which I then continue. Yes, I freely admit I'm unusual, but I find it incredibly frustrating that all the systems other people say "Well, it works for me" are, in my context, unusable. And when you say: > Along with that, email clients threading messages > for you allows for relatively seamless review of > history if necessary. ... you are buying into the fallacy that what works for you should work for any right-minded person. Having clients thread the messages actually compounds the problems for me.